>> Well, I wanted to attach it to the idl I sent out yesterday.
Yes, I will work on the IDL this weekend, we'll can have a pretty good
one done in a few days. Implementing the idl will take some longer.
>> I'm not really very clear right now how GMS and Overflow will
> combine and work together (I'll need to dig more into the code to know
> this for sure)
Overflow will work as it does standalone, and gms will pass on the calls
from and to the gui.
> As I said, I'd like this combination of GMS and Overflow to wrap into
> one idl (the one I sent out).
Yes, right.
> Along these lines, I'd like to try and dig more into Overflow and
> GMS code and start working with it. This will probably help us firm up
> the communication between the 'middle scripting engine' and the
> 'processing part' and help get the idl straightened out and all. So...
> I was going to throw myself out to the wolves and ask if Jarl and
> Jean-Marc and Dominic have parts of GMS and Overflow that they'd like
> me to work on/with, to help towards our integration goal. These can be
> small short term projects or whatever, but I'd like to help in this
> regard, and it would help me be more familiar with what is going on
> and actually be able to make more non-vague suggestions :-)
> So could we work something like this out?
Sure, but first let us define that GUI <-> Engine idl. When we got that
ready, things will be much more clear I guess.
> I think we sort of have a design down, although at least in my
> thinking, the XML representation, the makeup of the processing engine,
> and the 'middle scripting engine' and 'processing part' idls are the
> most important things we need to tackle in terms of internal structure.
>
Yes, the overflow people agreed to this design too, so let's make The idl
and make a list of features that the 3 projects need to implement in order
to let the layers work together.
bye,
jarl